@SysMan Welcome to the Hard Money Early Adopter thread! where Bitcoin is considered Money and a Public Good not to be exploited by for-profits!
who knows even where to begin? the arguments here against Core are long and lengthy so best to start with your list:
- Classic Hard-Fork - still doesn't has the performance optimizations done in bitcoind 0.12 by core. performance of normal bitcoind operation is one of general issue. there a lot of performance should be done.
Classic is testing a 0.12 branch now
https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic
- short term solution results/efficiency
Classic is/has been already running on over 1400 nodes w/o problems. SW Testnet just forked if you hadn't noticed so April is looking sketchy. it should be apparent to you that Core is rushing madly to get SW out so as to lock the community into their vision for Bitcoin. otoh, just ~10 LOC needed changing plus come attack checks to get Classic running.
- long term solution results/efficiency
it's clear SW changes Bitcoin economics. how do i know? a+b/4<=1 could just as easily been a+b/2<=1 or even a+b<=1. who chose? Pieter Wuille. a single guy. not to mention that all FN's and miners are forced to transmit all this extra BW to subsidize the formation of large, complex MS's that favor LN usage. what a coincidence. i don't even think anybody thinks that 2MB blks will damage the network at this pt. even Greg, Adam, & PT have gone on record stating that. sure there are other optimizations built in for tx mall, fraud proofs (not coded), etc. but those change the FN security model significantly away from miners to an assumption that FN's aren't censored. could be valid but maybe not and in any case assumes that growth of FN's via the SPV model is appropriate (it may not be). and i have a Q for you as a miner? just how bad of a problem is tx mall anyways? not much i'd guess.
- quality of code & performance
Jeff and Gavin have been around since the beginning and Gavin is #3 i commits i believe? plus, many other talented devs aren't contributing to Classic & BU if you hadn't noticed. there's nothing magical about Wuille, Maxwell, Luke et al. they can be replaced and given their behavior over the last year as a Blockstream monolith, i'd dare say that might be preferable. imo, all those guys would come over to Classic core dev b/c it's in their economic interest to do so. esp as i believe Blockstream investors/board would demand they get as close to the new code as possible to continue to effect change and influence. and that would be ok. as far as code, the only thing i'd say that will contribute to efficiency is libsecp256k1. all the other things devved over the last year have been to facilitate LN; CSV, CLTV, RBF. given that i think LN is unnecessary, you can see how i'd think their efforts have been misplaced while the blocksize issue has been ignored/stalled.
- ability to maintain and support code.
it's good to have diversity and decentralization in core dev and given the outstanding coding developments right here in BU, XThins, XValidation, & the soon to be released XPress Relay network we will have that. coders can be replaced when their motivations go against Bitcoin's ethos.
Classic delivers short term, but no long term plan, no performance improvements, no support, no ability to maintain code and less responsibility of long term results.
that's just wrong. it does via it's Roadmap. there is plenty of motivation AND opportunity for new core devs to step up and contribute to Classic. there's plenty of motivation to do so w/o the need for stock options, bonus incentives, 6 figure salaries, and 10x return pressures from investors. we're seeing it right now thru the work of guys like
@Peter Tschipper @theZerg @YarkoL @sickpig @dgenr8 @tomz
@yamamushi etc. their BTC holdings and the opportunity for speaking engagements, consulting contracts, fame, and contributing to a bigger cause motivates them.
you're new to the space so i'm not surprised many of these arguments may not resonate with you. but guys like me who've been around since the beginning hold these values. Bitcoin is the People's Money and has the chance to change the world for the better. but it needs to spread to every corner of the world and be cheap, fast, and inexpensive. just like cash. that is the very definition of decentralized and secure.
